 |
Do you approve of these amendments?
This poll is closed. |
| Yes |
   |
8 |
47.06% |
| No |
   |
9 |
52.94% |
| Total: |
17 voters |
100% |
|
|  |
 |
|
Bossy20000
|
|
Brussels
May 2003 time: 06:28
|
|
I agree with 1b, but not at all with 1a nor 2. The Marshal should have some (or even quite a lot) power. After all, he runs the war. And if we REALLY don't like how he works, we (the Poltiburo, STAVKA or a combination) can always send him on a vacation to Siberia.
I totally agree with comrade Knapovitch on this, we need a strong Marshal, with the Politburo as a counterbalance, but not as a dead weight on all decisions!
|
|
|  |
 |
|
Bossy20000
|
|
Brussels
May 2003 time: 06:28
|
|
Oh, what I forgot to mention, I think our Marshals until now have done a great job, and I think we shouldn't send them away just because their term is over. If somebody wants to take their place, go lobby with the Politburo or STAVKA and take his place like that. After all, we can't spoil any of our resources!
|
|
|  |
 |
|
H Tower
|
|
Who says I didn't vote yes?
|
|
|  |
 |
|
H Tower
|
|
The Politburo can always hold a loose definition of elections. they can create a nominations thread to see if anyone is interested in being Marshal, if no one steps forward, then the election is an "election of the willing" and the matter is dropped. That's a bit of a perversion of the amendment though
|
|
|  |
 |
|
Bossy20000
|
|
Brussels
May 2003 time: 06:28
|
|
But it saves us time. If nobody else wants the job, it is a waste of time to hold elections. If somebody wants to become marshal, he can always ask for elections.
|
|
|  |
All times are GMT. The time now is 05:28. Apolyton Time is 00:28. |
top of page
|
|
|
Forum Rules:
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
|
HTML code is ON
vB code is ON
Smilies are ON
[IMG] code is ON
|
|
|
|
|
|